add_midi_note

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=false, which the description does not contradict. However, the description does not disclose relevant behavior such as whether existing notes are preserved, whether a MIDI item must already exist, or whether this operation is non-destructive beyond the annotation's minimal hint. The example hints at repeated insertion but doesn't clarify underlying side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args list and example are relevant and helpful. However, the Args list is incomplete relative to the schema, which slightly undercuts the structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given seven parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description is not complete enough for correct invocation. Missing definitions of track_index and item_index are critical, and the lack of usage guidance relative to add_midi_notes_batch leaves the agent to guess.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description is responsible for explaining all parameters. It provides useful detail for pitch, velocity, start_beat, and length_beats, but completely omits the required track_index and item_index parameters, and also misses the channel parameter. The example implicitly suggests positional order but does not explain what 'item' and 'track' refer to.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence states a specific action ('Add a MIDI note to an item') and a distinguishing characteristic ('using musical timing'). The singular 'a MIDI note' helps differentiate it from the batch sibling, though it doesn't name the sibling explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_midi_notes_batch. It implies a single-note workflow through the example, but never states exclusion criteria or conditions for choosing the batch version.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.